The hard question over King v. Burwell is whether it is the job of the Supreme Court to ratify the sins of a government agency.
Justice Kennedy’s swing vote in King v. Burwell may hinge on whether Obamacare’s authors intended to screw states that refused to set up health-care exchanges.
The Supreme Court justices considering King v. Burwell’s Obamacare case should take note of this famous example of textualism’s merits.
The question in today’s Supreme Court case, King v. Burwell, is whether laws mean whatever the president wants them to mean.
If Obamacare fails, there will be immense political pressure on both sides. But don’t make the Democrats’ argument for them.
The Left doesn’t even bother pretending that the Constitution is more important than acts of progressive righteousness.
You don’t have to replace Obamacare’s bad ideas, you just have to get rid of them.
Jonathan Gruber is not the only one who lied to Americans about Obamacare. One could even say he was just parroting his boss.
A case over whether federal subsidies can operate within state insurance exchanges has implications for pro-life employers and employees.
- New York Times Admits Obama Admin Deployed Multiple Spies Against Trump Campaign In 2016The New York Times admitted on Thursday that the Obama continue reading >
- Every Future ‘Bachelor’ Contestant Should Follow Madison’s Lead On Fantasy Suite SexAside from being a reasonable way to test 'Bachelor' Pecontinue reading >
- Why Democrats Shouldn’t Keep Taking Minority Voters For GrantedIt is insulting for the left to think black and brown vcontinue reading >